Fred asks (re a Militant article):
>>I don't doubt that the Labor Party's promise is unreliable, but is it
true that they have dropped it?<<
No, they haven't dropped it as far as I know.
Labor's approach to these issues has actually been fairly consistent. It
opposed sending troops to Iraq as part of a unilaterial US-UK invasion,
arguing that a UN mandate was needed. Now it promises to bring the troops
home, but given Bush has made concessions to the UN and multilaterism,
Labor can talk of sending non-military "assistance" instead (customs
officers for example, to help seal the border) without really changing its
basic approach. I don't remember them talking of troops in any form though
(maybe someone can correct me.) The Latham speech which was praised by the
US ambassador did nuantially re-adjust the Labor Party position it's true,
but no big deal really. The ambassador's comments seemed to me to be
re-balancing the US government stance, which had caused outrage in
Australia.
Regarding Labor's support for the war in Afghanistan, that's nothing new.
Labor has long argued that instead of fighting in Iraq, Australia should
fight other battles closer to home and against terrorism.